✦ High Court of India · 07 Oct 2025

Pet it ioners v. St at e of Ut t arakhand Ot hers

Case Details High Court of India · 07 Oct 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
07 Oct 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,483 words

Counsel for t he pet it ioner s : Mr. Vinay Kum ar, Advocat e Mr. M.C. Pant , Adv ocat e Mr. Hem ant Singh Mahra, Adv ocat e Mr. Ket an Joshi, Advocat e Mr. R.S. Bisht , Adv ocat e Mr. Rahul Kandpal, Advocat e Mr. Sahil Mullick, Advocat e Mr. Niranj an Bhat t , Advocat e Mr. Pradeep Cham yal, Advocat e : Mr . Narayan Dat t , St anding Counsel : Mr . Ram j i Srivast ava, Adv ocat e Counsel for t he St at e Counsel for UKMSSB Counsel for t he caveat or : Mr. Bhagwat Mehr a, Advocat e J U D G M E N T H o n ’ b l e M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i , J. Since com m on quest ions of fact and law are involved in t hese writ pet it ions, t hese are being heard and decided by t his com m on j udgm ent , however, for t he sake of brevit y, fact s of Writ Pet it ion ( S/ S) No. 2090 of 2024 alone are being considered and discussed here.

2. Pet it ioners successfully com plet ed Diplom a 1 in Pharm acy Course bet ween 2001 and 2003. Diplom a in Pharm acy is essent ial qualificat ion for appoint m ent as Pharm acist in Depart m ent of Medical Healt h and Depart m ent of Medical Educat ion. All t he pet it ioners have becom e overage for appoint m ent as Pharm acist under t he St at e, as t he upper age lim it prescribed for appoint m ent as Pharm acist is 42 years, as per Rule 10 of t he relevant recruit m ent rules. I t is t he cont ent ion of pet it ioners t hat since t he crit eria for select ion for appoint m ent as Pharm acist is based on seniorit y and not on m erit , t herefore, a senior candidat e cannot be declared ineligible m erely because he has com plet ed 42 years of age on a part icular dat e, which is referred t o as t he cut- off dat e.

3. Rule 15( 2) of U.P. Pharm acist Service Rules, as applicable in t he St at e of Ut t arakhand and am ended vide not ificat ion dat ed 12.1.2006, provides t hat select ion for appoint m ent as Pharm acist shall be m ade based on year of passing t he Pharm acy Course and if t wo or m ore candidat es passed out Pharm acy Course in t he sam e year, t hen in t hat case t he one who scored m ore m arks shall have preferent ial right of appoint m ent . Advert isem ent dat ed 19.10.2024, Clause 18, also m akes a st ipulat ion t hat select ion shall be m ade based on year of passing t he Pharm acy Course.

4. Thus it is cont ended by learned Counsel for t he pet it ioners t hat t he rules provide for giving preference t o candidat es who passed Diplom a Pharm acy Course earlier in point of t im e, in ot her words, weight age has t o be given t o seniorit y, 2 however by fixing a cut- off dat e for det erm ining upper age lim it , t he senior- m ost persons would be elim inat ed from t he select ion process, which would be count er- product ive. Thus it is cont ended t hat in t he crit eria adopt ed for t he select ion process, t he requirem ent regarding upper age lim it should be relaxed in favour of such candidat es who have becom e overage.

5. Learned Counsel t he pet it ioners also cont ended t hat t he last select ion process appoint m ent as Pharm acist was held pursuant t o advert isem ent issued in 2011 and t hereaft er no select ion was held for appoint m ent as Pharm acist in Depart m ent of Medical Healt h and Depart m ent of Medical Educat ion. I t is furt her st at ed t hat in t he year 2020, Direct or General, Medical Healt h det erm ined 80 vacancies on t he post of Pharm acist , however t he select ion process was not init iat ed in 2020, due t o which pet it ioners, m ost of whom were wit hin age lim it in 2020, have crossed t he upper age lim it .

6. Mr. Bhagwat Mehra, learned Counsel for t he privat e respondent , however, point s t hat applicat ions were invit ed appoint m ent Vet erinary Pharm acist as m any as t im es, t herefore t he subm ission m ade on behalf of pet it ioners t hat for want of advert isem ent , t hey becam e overage is incorrect .

7. Learned Counsel for t he pet it ioners furt her cont ended t hat earlier also, St at e Governm ent grant ed relaxat ion in upper age lim it , in 2005, in t he select ion appoint m ent as Pharm acist in Ayurveda 3 Depart m ent t o candidat es who had becom e overage for want of select ion.

8. Pet it ioners have relied upon not ificat ion dat ed 28.2.2003, whereby Ut t aranchal Public Services ( Relaxat ion in Age Lim it for Recruit m ent ) Rules, 2003 have been not ified. Rule 3 of t he said Rules provides t hat t he St at e Governm ent can grant relaxat ion in upper age lim it in favour of one or m ore candidat es in appropriat e cases.

9. Since Rule 3 of t he aforesaid Rules enables t he St at e Governm ent t o consider grant of age relaxat ion in appropriat e cases, t herefore, t his Court t hinks t hat ends of j ust ice would be m et if t he m at t er referred t o t he St at e Governm ent t aking appropriat e decision in t he m at t er, in t he peculiar fact s and circum st ances of t he case.

10. Accordingly, writ pet it ions are disposed of wit h libert y t o t he pet it ioners t o approach t he com pet ent aut horit y t he St at e Governm ent by m aking a represent at ion. I f pet it ioners m ake a represent at ion t o Secret ary, Medical Educat ion on or before 10 t h Oct ober 2025, decision t hereupon shall be t aken by t he concerned Secret ary wit hin t hree m ont hs t hereaft er.

11. I t shall be open for t he select ing body t o proceed wit h t he select ion process.

12. Since respondent no. 5 is proceeding wit h t he process of docum ent verificat ion, t herefore, 4 pet it ioners shall also be provisionally perm it t ed t o part icipat e in t he process of docum ent s verificat ion by subm it t ing t heir applicat ions along wit h all requisit e docum ent s wit hin 48 hours. However, t heir result shall be kept in a sealed cover and shall not be declared t ill decision is t aken by t he St at e Governm ent . ( M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i , J.) Pr PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af 3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB5880 52DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR 5

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments